SupremeToday Landscape Ad
Back
Next
Judicial Analysis Court Copy Headnote Facts Arguments Court observation
judgment-img

2021 Supreme(MP) 463

G.S.AHLUWALIA
Pooran Singh Yadav – Appellant
Versus
Saroj Sharma – Respondent


Advocates:
Gaurav MIshra for applicant.

ORDER

1. This application under section 482 of CrPC has been filed against the order dated 30.7.2019 passed by Vth Additional Sessions Judge, to the Court of 1st Additional Sessions Judge Vidisha in Criminal Revision No. 6/2019, by which the order dated 15.3.2019 passed by J.M.F.C., Vidisha in Criminal Case No. 2061/2015 has been set aside and the respondent has been permitted to cross examine the applicant/complainant.

2. The necessary facts for disposal of present application in short are that the applicant has filed a criminal complaint under section 138 of Negotiable Instruments Act.

3. By order dated 12.7.2016, the trial Magistrate, directed that in the light of the judgment passed by the Supreme Court in the case of Indian Bank Association v. Union of India reported in (2014) 5 SCC 590, the respondent may file an application seeking permission to cross examine the complainant. However, no such application was filed. Thereafter, 20.10.2016, it was held by the trial Magistrate, that since, the respondent has not sought permission to cross examine the complainant, therefore, permission can not be granted and accordingly, the case was fixed for examination of the respondent under se

Click Here to Read the rest of this document
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
SupremeToday Portrait Ad
supreme today icon
logo-black

An indispensable Tool for Legal Professionals, Endorsed by Various High Court and Judicial Officers

Please visit our Training & Support
Center or Contact Us for assistance

qr

Scan Me!

India’s Legal research and Law Firm App, Download now!

For Daily Legal Updates, Join us on :

whatsapp-icon telegram-icon
whatsapp-icon Back to top